Potential Greenwashing at Dutch Supermarkets

Potential greenwashing at Dutch Supermarkets

(RetailTrends, 2016)

Name: Thibaut Marie Tardieu Student number: 960429823080 Study: Business and Consumer studies (BBC) Date: 05-11-2020 Supervisor: Anne Brouwer Second reader: Frans Verhees Course code: YSS-81812 ECTS: 12

Abstract

Sustainability plays an increasingly important role in the lives of Dutch consumers. Supermarkets are at the end of the supply chain and play an important role in greening the market. They are increasingly communicating sustainability actions through their corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports. However, on various occasions Dutch supermarkets have been accused of greenwashing: a combination of poor sustainability performance and communicating positively about sustainability. The major problem with greenwashing in this industry is that it could create a concerning status quo regarding true sustainability at Dutch supermarkets. Furthermore, the large amount of information available to consumers makes it difficult to distinguish between deceptive and truthful information communicated by supermarkets, creating the risk of confusion. To analyse Dutch supermarkets and how they respond to greenwashing accusations, their sustainability actions and communications. They are examined from different perspectives: the supermarket, the consumer, and society organisations. CSR reports from 2017–2019 are analysed for three supermarkets (Albert Heijn, PLUS, and Aldi) according to six dimensions: environment, animal welfare, packaging, food miles, health, and food waste. The Sustainable Brand Index™ for 2017– 2019 is used for the consumer sustainability perspective of these three supermarkets. Publications from society organisations that made it into popular media in the same time period are used to investigate whether any of the three supermarkets have been accused of greenwashing, and what the impact of these accusations was on supermarkets’ behaviour and on consumers’ sustainability perception of the supermarkets.

Results show that supermarkets report increasingly more on sustainability. To a great extent, this seems attributable to external incentives, such as ranking high(est) in the Sustainable Brand Index™ or receiving “awards” from society organisations for being the worst. An example is “winning” Het Gouden Windei for the most misleading food product of the year. Admittedly, criticised by the social organisation most comprehensive toward the market leader. However, the criticism of society organisations is essential. Social organisations function as moderators of the market. Although the published criticism does not result in a decrease in perception among consumers. It turned out that supermarkets are sensitive to the criticism of society organisations. As a consequence, they adjust their policy.

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... 2 List of Figures ...... 4 List of Tables ...... 4 1. Introduction ...... 5 1.1 Background and context ...... 5 1.2 Problem statement ...... 6 1.3 Research questions ...... 7 2. Literature review ...... 8 2.1 Key concepts ...... 8 2.2 Supermarkets ...... 9 2.3 Consumers ...... 9 2.4 Society organisations ...... 11 2.5 Overview of theory in figure form ...... 12 3. Research design and methods ...... 13 3.1 Aims and objectives ...... 13 3.2 Methods ...... 13 3.3 Supermarkets ...... 13 3.4 Consumers ...... 14 3.5 Society organisations ...... 14 4. Results ...... 16 4.1 Supermarkets ...... 16 4.2 Consumers ...... 22 4.3 Society organisations ...... 22 4.3.1 Environment ...... 23 4.3.2 Animal Welfare ...... 24 4.3.3 Packaging ...... 24 4.3.4. Food Miles ...... 24 4.3.5 Health ...... 25 4.3.6 Food waste ...... 25 5. Conclusion ...... 25 6. Discussion ...... 27 8. Reference list ...... 30

List of Figures

1. Perspectives relative to each other with dimensions

List of Tables

1. Dimensions and Supermarkets Relative to CSR 2. Sustainable Brand IndexTM and Supermarkets 3. Dimensions and Supermarkets Relative to Society Organisations

1. Introduction

1.1 Background and context

This thesis analyses Dutch supermarkets’ sustainability as described in their corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports and compares that to consumers’ perception of supermarkets’ sustainability. It also explores greenwashing accusations from society organisations regarding the supermarket’s sustainability efforts and whether this has led to a change in consumers’ perceptions and/or supermarkets’ sustainability reporting. This thesis topic came about when I was visiting Dutch supermarkets and noticed that they are increasingly acting on sustainability. In particular, at Albert Heijn, which had just won the award for being the most sustainable supermarket (Albert Heijn, 2020), the advertising was abundant. This has drawn my interest to the topic of sustainability at Dutch supermarkets and the credibility of these sustainability communications.

It is hard to ignore the call to protect the planet. “Earth Overshoot Day is the day on which humanity’s demands on nature exceed the Earth’s capacity to regenerate this demand for the entire year”. In 2020, Earth Overshoot Day fell on 22 August, which underscores the increasing call for sustainable development. Sustainable development meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (United Nations, 1987). The food supply chain is a pillar of sustainable development, with supermarkets being at the end of the food supply chain. The choice of supermarkets is essential. The policies they pursue affect the entire supply chain. If supermarkets do not ask for sustainable products, suppliers will not deliver them, and production companies will not produce them. Therefore, it is crucial to make the supermarket sector sustainable and, thus, sustainability must be considered (Earth Overshoot Day, 2020). Centraal Bureau Levensmiddelenhandel (CBL), the trade association of supermarkets and foodservice companies, states, “supermarket organisations take sustainable initiatives in the areas of assortment, biodiversity, climate, energy-saving, and packaging”. They also point to partnerships in the chain, since sustainability in the sector can only be established in collaboration with supply chain partners (CBL, 2020). The initiatives listed by CBL are typically communicated in the supermarket’s CSR reports. CSR reports are important for supermarkets’ strategy and communications. A study by Cone Communications (2015) shows that 91% of global consumers expect businesses to operate responsibly in order to address social and environmental issues. However, “there is no standard recipe: corporate sustainability is a custom-made process” (Van Marrewijk, 2003, p. 98). Each company chooses – from the many opportunities – which concept and definition works best for them. They match the company’s aims and intentions and align it with the company’s strategy as a response to the circumstances in which it operates. Thus, every company has its own interpretation of sustainability for CSR strategy. Some companies, like Ben and Jerry’s, adapt their entire business to be as sustainable as possible. Ben and Jerry’s competitive advantage revolves around sustainability, and they are very transparent about how they achieve sustainability. However, most companies look at making specific processes more sustainable. Unfortunately, there are also companies that communicate they are sustainable and use this as a competitive advantage but are not doing anything to achieve a more sustainable outcome. This is called greenwashing. Greenwashing is a combination of poor sustainability performance and positive communication about the sustainability of the company (Delmas & Burbano, 2011). Greenwashing occurs when companies try to mislead consumers in their sustainable choices.

According to Delmas and Burbano (2011, p. 84), “the prevalence of greenwashing has skyrocketed in recent years; more and more firms have combined poor environmental performance with positive communication about environmental performance”. For supermarkets, greenwashing means that they can suggest that they are sustainable and generate additional customers without bearing the costs of sustainable change. Research has found that 66% of consumers say they are willing to pay more for sustainable brands (Nielsen, 2015). In addition, in 2015, consumer sales from brands with a demonstrated commitment to sustainability grew more than 4% globally, while those without such a commitment grew less than 1% (Nielsen, 2015). Through marketing, a company can shift its customers’ focus away from polluting manufacturing practices, for example. They can emphasise that they donate to organisations committed to a more sustainable world and list sustainability awards they have won, diverting attention from the unsustainability of their products or practices (Delmas & Burbano, 2011). In addition to Delmas and Burbano (2011), TerraChoice Environmental Marketing (TerraChoice), a Canadian environmental marketing agency, also found high numbers of greenwashing, particularly in supermarkets. They surveyed seven Australian stores in 2008 and 2009 and found that only five products out of the 866 products that made environmental claims did not engage in some form of greenwashing (TerraChoice, 2010). Some researchers even state that sustainable strategies are mainly aimed at greenwashing and are never meant to be implemented (Schmuck et al., 2018). The abundance of information about sustainability both in CSR reports and on products themselves makes it challenging for consumers to determine the truthfulness of sustainability intentions. To assist consumers, various society organisations try to keep supermarkets accountable for their sustainable policies. If supermarkets fail to abide by their policies, these organisations raise the issue with consumers, typically through popular media.

1.2 Problem statement

The combination of the prevalence of greenwashing in both supermarkets (Terrachoice, 2010) and company reports (Delmas & Burbano, 2011), together with consumers not knowing what information is truthful, plus relying on society organisations to raise the alarm, is very concerning. In the Dutch supermarket context, this raises the question of if and to what extent Dutch supermarkets greenwash, which this thesis investigates. It is important to look at this issue because if Dutch supermarkets do not have a positive effect on sustainability, even while consumers think they do, it could create a dangerous status quo for others also to get involved with greenwashing.

This thesis aims to provide insight into whether Dutch supermarkets greenwash in their CSR reports, whether this aligns with consumers’ perceptions of supermarkets’ sustainability, and the type of publications by society organisations accusing supermarkets of greenwashing. In addition, it investigates whether publications by these organisations have led to a change in CSR activities and reporting by supermarkets and/or in a lower perception of sustainability from consumers.

1.3 Research questions

The main questions that will be answered in this thesis are: How truthful are supermarkets’ CSR reports? And does accusation of greenwashing by society organisations impact supermarkets’ actions and consumers’ perceptions of supermarket sustainability?

These thesis questions aim to determine how consumers, supermarkets, and society organisations perceive sustainability and the result of being accused of greenwashing by society organisations.

The following sub-questions assist in answering the research question: 1. What do supermarkets communicate in their CSR reports? How do consumers perceive the sustainability of Dutch supermarkets? 2. What do society organisations communicate about the sustainability of Dutch supermarkets? 3a. Do publications by society organisations have an impact on CSR activities by supermarkets? 3b. Do publications by society organisations have an effect on consumers’ sustainability perceptions? The purpose of the combination of sub-questions is to first look at consumers, supermarkets, and society organisations individually, and then to compare and contrast the results.

2. Literature review

2.1 Key concepts

The purpose of this chapter is to gain insight into the key concepts of this thesis. Through triangulation, the three different perspectives—supermarkets, consumers, and society organisations—are explained. Conceptual framework triangulation increases the research results’ credibility and validity (Noble & Heale, 2019), as the method uses various datasets to point out distinct aspects of a phenomenon. The aim of using triangulation is to provide a more balanced elaboration of the complex sustainable phenomenon called “greenwashing”.

Before discussing the three perspectives, a brief overview of sustainability, its dimensions, and greenwashing types is provided.

“Sustainability demands ways of living, working, and being that enables all people of the world to lead healthy, fulfilling, and economically secure lives without destroying the environment and without endangering the future welfare of people and the planet” (Santillo, 2007, p. 62). A sustainable lifestyle is developed by tackling global problems such as environmental pollution, climate change, or poverty (Hanss & Böhm, 2011). The dimensions that constitute sustainability vary. For this thesis, the sustainability dimensions defined by Rabobank are used. These include environment, animal welfare, packaging, food miles, health, and food waste (Rabobank, 2019). The environment indicates the impact of production on the immediate environment, the climate, and nature. Animal welfare refers to how animals are treated in the fields of breeding, feeding, transport, and slaughter. Packaging addresses the (plastic) packaging of products. Food miles is about where products come from and transparency about their origin. Health involves healthier food choices, including choices that are better for the environment. Since the focus of this thesis is on the environment rather than on health, the health dimension in this thesis only includes CSR activities related to food choices that are healthier for the environment. An example could be promoting a vegetarian or flexitarian diet. Since this is the only definition not fully in line with Rabobank’s definitions of its dimensions, the term is denoted with an * (i.e. health*). Greenwashing can occur at the firm or the product level. Poor environmental performance with positive communication is seen as firm-level greenwashing (Delmas & Burbano, 2011). The product level includes different forms of greenwashing. TerraChoice (2010) pioneered seven types (sins) of greenwashing: • Sin of hidden trade-off: Implying a product is “green” based on an unreasonably small set of attributes without attention to other significant environmental effects. • Sin of no proof: Producing an environmental claim that cannot be verified by reliable supporting information. • Sin of vagueness: Using terms that are too broad or poorly defined (e.g. 100% natural). • Sin of irrelevance: Communicating a green claim that is true but accounts for all products in its category, or communicating an environmental issue that is not relevant to the product or category. • Sin of lesser of two evils: Highlighting a specific “green” part of a product to distract the consumer from the environmental impact of the product category. • Sin of fibbing: Communicating an environmental claim that is false.

• Sin of false labels: Communicating an unclear quality label or third-party endorsement exploiting consumers’ demand for sustainable products.

An example of greenwashing in The Netherlands is Foodwatch’s “Het Gouden Windei” award. This award is handed out annually for the most misleading food product of the year. In 2018, one of the nominees was “Cano Water”, which according to the producer, is environmentally friendly water from a can. However, the water comes all the way from Austria or Iceland. Furthermore, they claim to be an alternative to plastic bottles. Consumers are misled by beautiful environmental stories and end up buying environmentally unfriendly cans of water (Foodwatch NL, 2018). This product is a clear example of greenwashing, as manifested by TerraChoice.

The following subchapters look at the three perspectives analysed in this thesis: supermarkets, consumers, and society organisations.

2.2 Supermarkets

A mission statement stresses the company’s policies and values and is as short, memorable, and meaningful as possible (Kotler & Keller, 2015). The mission statement is shared within the company and with customers to provide a shared sense of purpose, direction, and opportunity.

During the coronavirus crisis, consumers put extra pressure and emphasis on companies to pursue sustainability and reflect sustainability in their missions. Some say that consumers demand even more from companies than countries (Sustainable Brand Index™, 2020).

Due to this pressure, CSR is increasingly important for corporations and business leaders (Porter & Kramer, 2006). CSR calls for a three-pronged attack that relies on proper legal, ethical, and social behaviour (Kotler & Keller, 2015). It is about companies’ awareness of contributing to sustainability. They “must balance more carefully their growth goals with the need to pursue sustainability” (Kotler, 2011, p. 132). Legal behaviour means that companies abide by the rules. Moreover, employees are made aware of the regulations. In line with social responsibility behaviour, companies must practice their social morals in specific dealings with customers and stakeholders (Kotler & Keller, 2015). Ultimately, CSR can be used for a point-of-difference strategy. For companies, sustainability is used as a competitive advantage to distinguish themselves in the current market (Gupta & C. Benson, 2012, p. 133). A value chain is a tool for identifying ways to create more value for the customer (Kotler & Keller, 2015). The goal is to make the core competencies of the company better than those of its competitors. This results in the creation of competitive advantage. Competitive advantage makes a significant contribution to perceived customer benefits (Kotler & Keller, 2015). The danger of greenwashing is, therefore lurking.

2.3 Consumers

“Attitudes towards consumption have shifted in recent years and brought increasing concern over ecological, societal, and developmental impact” (Hamari et al., 2015, p. 2047). It has become clear that sustainability is increasingly on the agenda of consumers.

Research has shown that intrinsic motivations are a strong determinant of attitude (Hamari et al., 2015, p. 2055). When consumers understand the urgency of environmental change, they show a positive attitude towards sustainable consuming (Paul et al., 2016). However, the markets for sustainable products must be there. Efforts to offer more green choices are required to entice more potential consumers to view sustainability as mainstream (Paul et al., 2016). When sustainable products become mainstream, this can have a significant effect on their consumption, in turn making the world more sustainable. The kind of sustainable products consumers buys is essential: “Exploring how we can better institutionalise full supply chain responsibility is one of humanity’s major research challenges toward achieving a sustainable future” (Hoekstra & Wiedmann, 2014, p. 1117). The supply chain is a crucial factor in enabling consumers to make a difference in sustainability. Sustainable consumer purchases that affect the entire supply chain are essential to make a substantial contribution to sustainability.

Companies’ communications about their sustainability strategies do not necessarily present an honest and truthful perspective on the reality of operational performance of these sustainability strategies. The Sustainable Brand Index™ encourages organisations to communicate transparently about sustainability. The Sustainable Brand Index™ measures the sustainability perception of brands across industries and countries (Sustainable Brand IndexTM, 2020). The Sustainable Brand Index™ (2019-2020) conducts desk research and surveys on how consumers perceive the sustainability of brands and reality. They use the UN Global Goals for Sustainable Development for a sustainable definition. The Sustainable Brand Index™ Business to Consumer data comes from an independent three-part study based on desk research and two quantitative web surveys of the target audience. The rankings display how consumers perceive brand sustainability. For the conducted surveys, the Sustainable Brand Index™ recruits respondents based on gender, age, and geography. For the selection process, when determining which brands to research, several parameters are utilized: the market share of the specific market, turnover, and general brand awareness. Supermarkets considered in the Netherlands are: Albert Heijn, Jumbo, Lidl, PLUS, Aldi, Coop, Dirk, and SPAR.

Industries that have a more significant impact on sustainability are also facing higher consumer demands. We see that the perception of industries is again based on the image of the sector. Recent public scandals have negatively impacted the perception of sustainability and responsibility. Even if one sector is usually viewed positively, scandals with a few individual brands can create a negative perception of the whole industry (e.g. banking).

The Sustainable Brand Index™ (2019-2020) shows that the Dutch market is transitioning into a higher and more mature level of awareness regarding sustainability on average. The Dutch consumer is quite aware of sustainability issues and the role of brands in the equation. Consumers are knowledgeable and vocal about sustainability, which means demand is rising. Brands need to take a clear stand on what sustainability means for them, and consumers can be empowered to join their mission. There is a strong focus on the business sector. Dutch consumers put much faith in companies to push sustainability and innovation forward. In the Netherlands, when it comes to social and environmental responsibility, people believe that individuals are responsible for changing their consumption patterns to fight climate change.

Data in the report shows that the ranking score of the Netherlands exhibits the most significant increase in all European countries surveyed. This shows increased consumer awareness levels of the environmental and social responsibility of companies. Dutch consumers have been highly influenced (79%) by sustainability in purchasing decisions. However, the gap between talking about sustainability issues and changing one’s behaviours is still considerable. Dutch consumers sometimes tend to overestimate their own knowledge and understanding of the challenges at hand. Most consumers are optimists and believe that we can solve the climate crisis. According to Dutch consumers, reduced consumption and technological advancements are the solutions to the sustainability problem. Of Dutch consumers, 46% are convinced that individuals need to make sacrifices and reduce consumption to solve the climate crisis. Dutch consumers have faith in companies to put sustainability and innovation on the agenda. There have been several high-profile sustainability cases over the past year, in which companies have made sustainability statements. Dutch brands are more about ‘how to become sustainable’, instead of ‘just talking about it’. What was a vague and intangible idea a few years ago is now starting to be understood by companies as well by Dutch consumers. As seen from the results, this is translated into messages that consumers understand and engage in.

2.4 Society organisations

The mission statements that companies present lead to strategic decisions. Due to pressure from society, these mission statements often contain CSR initiatives. With CSR initiatives becoming more and more widespread, greenwashing is a mounting concern that undermines the credibility of corporate communications (Lyon & Montgomery, 2013). It is, therefore, vital for independent parties to serve as information providers. As Delmas and Burbano (2011, p. 70) state, “activist groups and society organisations play a critical role as informal monitors of firm greenwashing. By campaigning against and spreading information about incidents of greenwashing, these organisations work towards holding brown firms accountable”. Brown firms are companies with poor environmental performance. The society organisations looked at in this thesis are pressure groups— interest groups that react in an organised fashion for the protection of their interests (Güney, 2014). We find that the pressure from some groups improves the quality of report transparency (Fernandez- Feijoo et al., 2013). “Their central view suggests that organisations primarily react to outside influences such as non-governmental organisation activism or governmental regulation when they adopt CSR strategies and practices” (Wolf, 2013, p. 325). These groups, in the form of society organisations, influence sustainability transparency at companies. Transparency caused by pressure groups may also bring additional benefits. When organisations build a reputation by promoting environmental and social sustainability, this reputation improves their legitimacy and access to crucial resources (Wolf, 2013). Some society organisations look at the sustainability of supermarkets. These organisations check or test supermarkets’ sustainability aspects, such as environmental or animal welfare claims. Examples are Voedingscentrum and Consumentenbond. Voedingscentrum is 100% subsidised by the Dutch government (Voedingscentrum, 2020), and Consumentenbond is a non-profit organisation with high authority among Dutch consumers. Both of these organisations are objective and reliable sources of information with independent positions. Society organisations can benefit from casting supermarkets in a bad light to reinforce their views on increasing supermarket sustainability. This has been proven by a campaign of “Wakker Dier” against “Mora”, for example (Redactie Adformatie, 2007), showing that Society organisations have the power to force change on supermarkets.

2.5 Overview of theory in figure form

In the figure below, the relationships among the perspectives are stated, together with the different dimensions. In the figure, the arrows represent communication flows. The communication flow from the supermarket to the consumer represents CSR reports. The arrows coming from society organisations are media publications accusing supermarkets of greenwashing.

Dimensions

Environ - Supermarkets ment Sustainability, communications, reports & ads.

Animal welfare

Society

Pack - organisations aging Accusing supermarkets of Greenwashing. Information provision.

Food

miles

Health* Consumers Who is more green than ever?

Food waste

Figure 1: Perspectives relative to each other with dimensions

3. Research design and methods

3.1 Aims and objectives

This thesis investigates Dutch supermarkets’ communication about sustainability through three lenses: the supermarket, the consumer, and society organisations. The research has several objectives. Firstly, the corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports of three supermarkets are examined and compared based on the sustainability dimensions (i.e. environment, animal welfare, packaging, food miles, health*, and food waste) mentioned previously. Secondly, consumers’ views of these supermarkets, in terms of their sustainability stance are considered by looking at the Sustainable Brand IndexTM. Thirdly, the role of society organisations and their influence on both supermarkets and consumers is investigated.

3.2 Methods

Secondary data is analysed to examine these three perspectives. This thesis focuses on the Netherlands; hence, Dutch supermarkets are investigated. The chosen supermarkets are Albert Heijn, PLUS, and Aldi. The combination of these supermarkets is chosen because of their different market positions in the Dutch market. Albert Heijn has the largest market share of all Dutch supermarkets and is at the top of the Sustainable Brand IndexTM. PLUS is chosen because, it has been chosen as the most sustainable Dutch supermarket for the fifth year in a row in the sustainability study of GfK (PLUS, 2020). Aldi is primarily known to be a low-cost supermarket, rather than a sustainable supermarket. Aldi Nederland is part of the Aldi Nord company. Aldi Nord has several supermarket chains in countries in Northern Europe. These countries are reported together in the CSR report but are handled separately. Reports from the years 2017, 2018, and 2019 are used because the Sustainable Brand IndexTM exists since 2017, and this enables one to compare all three supermarkets’ CSR reports together with their Sustainable Brand IndexTM rankings. The business to consumer data for the Sustainable Brand Index™ is an independent three-part study based on desk research and two quantitative web-surveys among the target audience. The target audience is consumers or the public, aged 16-75 years. As mentioned above, the CSR reports will be used as a basis to distinguish similarities and contrasts between the three supermarkets based on the six sustainability dimensions identified by Rabobank (2019).

3.3 Supermarkets

Firstly, the mission statements of the relevant supermarkets are examined. These stress the companies’ policies and values and are as short, memorable, and meaningful as possible (Kotler & Keller, 2015) to achieve positioning in the market. Companies have to publish CSR reports according to European laws (GRI, 2017). These rules are also implemented in Dutch law. Organisations must produce a non-financial report if they have over 500 employees or net turnover over EUR 40 million, or if they are public interest entities. All three supermarkets fulfil these criteria. The CSR report must contain certain features: environmental, social, and employee matters, human rights, and anti- corruption matters. Companies must disclose these features of their business model as well as non-financial key performance indicators relevant to the business. For the supermarkets in the Netherlands, this results in “het duurzaamheidsverslag”. Comparing three years of CSR

reports for the three supermarkets allows year-to-year comparison of the supermarkets to themselves (i.e. within comparison) and to each other (i.e. between comparison). All CSR reports are publicly available for viewing. The reports are available online and are referenced annually. Most CSR reports investigated use the sustainability dimensions outlined earlier in the thesis. Where sections in the report deviate from the sustainability dimensions, the section(s) are categorised according to the most suitable dimension.

3.4 Consumers

The Sustainable Brand Index™ provides the consumer perspective. The Sustainable Brand Index™ ranking shows how brands are perceived on sustainability by consumers in the Netherlands. An overview is made of the positions of the supermarkets to be capable of comparing them with each other, then conclude with regards to other perspectives. The position in the Sustainable Brand IndexTM of 2020 relates to the year 2019 at the supermarket. Thus, with the comparison of the other perspectives concerning the Sustainable Brand IndexTM, the previous year is considered. The basis for the ranking in the Sustainable Brand Index™ is the UN Global Goals for Sustainable Development.

The scores of the Sustainable Brand Index ™ ranking are based on two main components: responsibility for the environment and social responsibility. Environmental and social responsibility can be seen as a summary of the dimensions of the environment, animal welfare, packaging, food miles, health*, and food waste. The final score for each brand is a percentage based on how consumers score the supermarket for both the environment (100%) and social responsibility (100%). The maximum score a brand can achieve is 200%. The scores are then ranked.

3.5 Society organisations

There are also society organisations that look at the sustainability of supermarkets. These organisations check or test supermarkets on sustainability aspects such as environmental or animal welfare claims. They also check quality marks and certifications. Because so many of these marks are used, it is difficult for consumers to know the legitimacy of each of these marks and certifications. Research from Voedingscentrum (2019) looked at 100 current quality marks in the Netherlands. Several top-quality marks were awarded, namely: ASC, Beter Leven Keurmerk, Demeter, EKO, Europees keurmerk voor biologische landbouw, Fairtrade/Max Havelaar, On the way to PlanetProof, MSC, Rainforest Alliance, and UTZ. Some organisations specifically look at supermarkets. The Consumentenbond (2018) set up a project to inform consumers about various sustainability aspects surrounding fruit and vegetables and Dutch supermarket chains’ policies in this area. As an example of bad policy, working conditions in developing countries are not sufficient, and research shows that the five largest Dutch supermarkets are still missing many opportunities in this area (Polderman, 2014). Voedingscentrum is 100% subsidised by the Dutch government (Voedingscentrum, 2020) and Consumentenbond is a non-profit organisation with high authority among Dutch consumers. Both these organisations are objective and reliable sources of information with independent positions. Other society organisations, such as Greenpeace, Foodwatch, Natuur & Milieu, and Wakker Dier, also investigate sustainability aspects of supermarkets.

Although these organisations are still considered to be reliable, they are potentially somewhat biased when calling out greenwashing because they tend only to focus on aspects that align with their values or mission, such as animal cruelty, slave labour, or environmental issues. In this thesis, there is a search for publications by society organisations on the demarcated theme within the past three years. It is expected that the number of publications by society organisations accusing any of these three supermarkets of greenwashing will vary by theme. It is expected that more organisations will talk about animal wellbeing than food miles, for example. If a variety of publications are found for a particular theme, the thesis will only look at top publications—articles that made it into the Dutch mainstream media (i.e. newspaper, TV, social media, etc.). These greenwashing publications are then compared to the specific CSR reports to investigate the validity of the greenwashing claims. The Greenpeace reporting is used as a basis in combination with the relevant supermarket. Due to knowledge of the market, for part of the dimensions, other social organisations will be used. This method makes it is possible to analyse whether publications have affected supermarkets’ strategic sustainability decisions and whether these publications have affected consumers’ sustainability perceptions of the accused supermarkets (i.e. lower ranking in the Sustainable Brand Index™ the following year).

4. Results

4.1 Supermarkets

In this chapter, CSR reports from 2017 to 2019 from Albert Heijn, PLUS, and ALDI are analysed to see how dimensions of their sustainability policies are being communicated. The sustainability dimensions used are environment, animal welfare, packaging, food miles, health*, and food waste (Rabobank, 2019).

First, the mission statements of Albert Heijn, PLUS, and Aldi are checked. Albert Heijn is the largest Dutch chain of supermarkets, owned by Ahold Delhaize, with more than 100,000 employees. Their mission statement is: “The most loved and healthy company in and for the Netherlands. We make our customers happy. We want to inspire, surprise them and let them experience our commitment. So that we genuinely matter in all 900 neighbourhoods where our stores are located” (Alles over Albert Heijn | Albert Heijn). Albert Heijn presents their CSR report as an independent report to their annual company report. PLUS is a supermarket chain with 270 supermarkets. PLUS’s mission statement is: “PLUS is a cooperative of proud supermarket entrepreneurs. Our common goal is sustainable business operations where the customer comes first, and the focus is on good food, for everyone every day” (PLUS Als Organisatie—over PLUS | PLUS). At PLUS, the CSR report is processed in a separate section of the annual report. Aldi’s mission statement is: “Simple, responsible, and reliable—these three core values guide our actions” (ALDI Nord). Aldi NORD publishes a CSR report every two years, with a progress report in between. The CSR report includes chains in different countries, but a distinction is made per country.

The degree of reporting is analysed based on a scorecard. This scorecard ranges from 'lacking' up to 'extensive'. Initially, it is analysed if the dimension is discussed. Subsequently, it is analysed in what depth the dimensions are discussed. Are there only examples or is there an extensive discussion of policy.

The delineated results follow the sustainability dimensions, grouped by year and supermarket. The table below shows an overview of the results. The rating a supermarket receives depends on how extensively each dimension is discussed in their CSR reports and rankings range from extensive to lacking:

Dimension / AH AH AH PLUS PLUS PLUS Aldi Aldi Aldi Supermarket 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 Environment ± + ++ + + + ++ ++ ++

Animal - ± + ± ± ± - - - ± welfare Packaging - - ++ ++ ± ++ ++ - ++ ++

Food miles - + ++ + + + ± ± ±

Health* - - - ± ± + + ± ± ±

Food waste ± ++ ++ - ± + - - ±

Standardisation - - - ++ ± + + + ++ ++ /Results

Table 1: Dimensions and Supermarkets Relative to CSR ++ Extensive: defined with numbers (concrete results/verifiable) and future concept (policy) + Reasonably extensive: defined with numbers and not elaborated in detail ± Reported, but not always with equally relevant cases; stand-alone examples - Named without further detailed explanation - - Lacking

Policy and objectives will be highlighted per dimension.

2017:

o Albert Heijn: (Albert Heijn, 2017) The following pillars are outlined: the environment, animal welfare. It is advocated to have an active contribution to a healthy and sustainable society.

Environment: Some stores have been made climate neutral. The issues discussed are making the fleet more sustainable, with several trucks and delivery bicycles for the city as a start. Albert Heijn also speaks of making all stores climate neutral by 2025 Animal welfare: Named without further detailed explanation. Packaging: Lacking. Food Miles: Named without further detailed explanation. Health*: Collaboration with the Green protein Alliance. Food waste: The partnership with the food bank is discussed. Giving a sustainable destination to leftover food.

PLUS: (PLUS, 2017) CSR has been high on the PLUS agenda for years. Within the cooperative business model of self-employed entrepreneurs, they are working on long-term goals such as sustainability and health. PLUS, therefore, carries out a materiality analysis. Different groups of stakeholders (customers, entrepreneurs, social organisations, and the Green Team) are asked which priorities PLUS should set when it comes to CSR and responsibility. Five pillars have been

drawn up: the responsible origin of products, health and vitality, a better environment, local involvement, and fair employment practices. Environment: Working together with more suppliers also works on making their products more sustainable and healthier. Having the products on the shelves that an impact right up to the start of the chain. Sold fish (100%) with a sustainability label. Some stores have been made climate neutral. Animal welfare: 90% of all pork meat products have the Beter Leven 1-star quality mark, and PLUS has started making chicken meat products more sustainable. Since 2012, only free- range eggs with the Beter Leven Keurmerk 2-stars and organic eggs with the Beter Leven Keurmerk 3-stars have been sold. Packaging: A critical look at the amount of packaging material, with the ambition to make changes in 2018. Food Miles: By the end of 2019, they want the full range of fruit and vegetables from the Netherlands to be certified. Use the due diligence approach: "Know the Chain". They aim to inspire, support and motivate the suppliers and others. Lastly, by making logistics more sustainable, including sustainable double-deck trailers. Health*: Encourage consumers to eat out of season. And an extra vegetarian assortment Food waste: Named without further detailed explanation. Collaborate more with food banks

o Aldi: (ALDI North, 2017) Aldi wants all customers to do their shopping with a clear conscience. To live up to that claim, Aldi is committed to more sustainability at discounters. The domains in which they are active are chain responsibility, conservation of the natural resource. Environment: Affixing the PlanetProof quality mark to all in the Netherlands produced fruit and vegetable products. Making supermarkets more sustainable with an increase of 40% compared to 2015. Animal welfare: Named without further detailed explanation. Packaging: The goal is switching all newly purchased sales, conversion and transport packaging for products to sustainably certified materials. Food Miles: Increase the number of products containing meat and fish with the ALDI Transparency Code (ATC). Set up a control system. Health*: Aldi introduces the campaign 'Meat-free days'. Attention is also being paid to better visualization of vegetarian packaging. Food waste: In the process of developing guidelines, food donations made to the food bank.

2018:

o Albert Heijn: (Albert Heijn, 2018) They say they are committed to the environment, health, fair products, animal welfare, and the neighbourhoods where their stores are located. They say they are in constant dialogue with their customers, stakeholders, and partners with a collective ambition to do even better next year. Albert Heijn says they are creating more chain transparency. Therefore, considerable attention is paid to transparency. The theme of food waste is also discussed, and partnerships are described. And lastly, policy and new measures are introduced.

Environment: Reducing CO2 resource emissions. Making dairy products more sustainable. Green electricity in shops and gasless shops. Making distribution centres more sustainable Animal welfare: Expanding the range of free-range and organic eggs. Offer certified sustainable fish (100%).

Packaging: A policy has been developed on how to deal with packaging. In 2025, Aldi wants to reduce 25% of packaging on their brands. In addition, use 100% recyclable material for packaging. Introduce 4R policy: reduce - reuse -recycle – renew. There is given insight into how much packaging material has been saved. Food Miles: Achieving chain transparency in order to make this transparent for the customer in 2025. Health*: Named without further detailed explanation Food waste: Collaboration with the Food Bank, how to transport it to the food bank. By 2030, contribute to a 50% reduction in food waste. Talk to suppliers about food waste and help customers with food waste. Introducing the app 'Too Good To Go', selling products that would otherwise be thrown away. Overview of how much food to going food bank

o PLUS: (PLUS, 2018) In the upcoming years, PLUS strives to make its product range healthier and more sustainable. Further, they continue to communicate about this as transparently as possible to their customers and other stakeholders. Furthermore, corporate objectives are clearly stated to be sustainable. The aim is to gain insight into the negative impact of food production via a value creation model. Environment: 2% less CO2 emissions compared to 2018’s target and continue to make stores climate neutral. Fruit and vegetables with satisfactory to criteria ‘On the way to PlanetProof’. Animal welfare: The turnover of meat products with the Beter Leven quality mark increased by 14% in 2018. With this figure, the goal for 2018 has been achieved. Packaging: Use 20% less packaging material by 2025. Packaging for private label products on the following three principles: as minimal as possible, renewable and recyclable packaging. Food Miles: Continue with Due diligence approach. Health*: Encouraging the consumption of vegetables as a meat substitute. Food waste: Try to prevent food waste is it low-hanging fruit, such as the collaboration with the food banks and the discount stickers.

o Aldi: (ALDI North, 2018) The CSR report of 2018 is a progress report for the year before. The report is used to show that the situation is now. It indicates that they will focus more on packaging. Furthermore, they will focus on the needs of the consumer; according to Aldi, these are simplicity, responsibility, and reliability. The focus rests on packaging and modern nutrition. Environment: Continues (Aldi?) to implement policy. Animal welfare: Lacking Packaging: Continuing on the road to less and sustainable packaging. Their ambition: 10% less plastic waste in the supermarkets. Introduction of packing policy, by prevention, reuse and Recycling. Use of less packaging material at the private label. Food Miles: Continue to implement policy. Health*: Even more sustainable assortment, continue with the same policy Food waste: In the process of developing guidelines.

2019:

o Albert Heijn: (Albert Heijn, 2019) Albert Heijn has chosen to make the sustainability team part of Albert Heijn’s commercial department and thus, integrate them into daily management. Moreover, the theme of “sustainability” is becoming more integrated throughout business operations. Albert Heijn intends to use the sustainability strategy to take responsibility when it comes to the impact of their chains on people, animals, and the environment. The sustainability pillars of Albert Heijn are healthy living conditions, less packaging, less food waste, chain transparency, and being better for the climate. Discussions are held with other stakeholders when it comes to sustainability pillars, and afterwards it is promoted to make a change. Environment: A decrease in CO2 emissions from 272 kilos of CO2 per m2 of sales area in 2018 to 231 kilos in 2019; this means that Albert Heijn's total CO2 emissions have been reduced by 48% compared to 2008. Animal welfare: Provide insight into the use of the 'Beter leven' quality mark. Packaging: Make more policies regarding packaging material, which, among other things, results in 500,000 kilos less plastic per year due to a thin layer of foil on fruit dishes and cheese. Food Miles: More transparency about the origin of products, with the publication of an online world map with over 1,200 production locations private label products. Health*: Albert Heijn attempts to tempt the customer to eat more vegetable proteins. A campaign has also been set up to encourage people to try vegetarian food. Food waste: Reduction of food waste within Albert Heijn by more than 2.2 million kilos. Launch of dynamic discounting, where products are automatically discounted based on their best before date.

o PLUS: (PLUS, 2019) PLUS strives for sustainable business operations where the customer comes first, and the focus is on good food, for everyone, every day. As a cooperative of supermarket entrepreneurs, they organise their activities for this. With their core activities (purchasing, distribution, and sales), they add value to the chain, and they achieve results in the short and long terms. Environment: Set up PlanetProof together with the suppliers of dairy, cheese and vegetables. Energy-saving measures and efficient and therefore, environmentally friendly logistics are given much attention. Animal welfare: More products with 'Beter leven' quality mark. Packaging: Concrete results on packaging through collaboration, resulting in annual savings of around 40,000 kilos of plastic. Food Miles: Even more products from Dutch soil and continue to apply due diligence. Health*: Encouraging the consumption of less meat through a number of campaigns. Food waste: Continuing to work with food banks.

o Aldi: (ALDI North, 2019) The 2019 CSR report makes a more apparent distinction between the different countries where Aldi operates. It was decided to take a more scientific approach to achieve an Aldi sustainability objective. Aldi is paying more attention to the topic of food waste

Environment: 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by the end of 2021. LED lighting in all new stores by the end of 2019 and LED lighting in all distribution centres. Ongoing

with much policy. However, not everything is achieved and that some goals have been postponed. Animal welfare: Extension of animal welfare criteria, project continues. Packaging: 100% recyclable, compostable or reusable packaging by the end of 2025. 100% sustainably certified and/or recycled materials for all product packaging by the end of 2020. Expansion of unpackaged articles in the fruit and vegetable sector to at least 40% by the end of 2025. Joining the Plastic Pact NL. Food Miles: New goal, 100% labelling of all national products for all new products/ purchases by the end of 2021. Health*: Introduction of own brand for vegetarian and vegan products or all new products/purchases end of 2021. Food waste: Guideline for dealing with food loss by the end of 2020, in which the previous goal has not been reached. Setting new goals, integrating 100% of all stores in a partnership to reduce food waste by the end of 2021

The analysis shows that it is possible to address several matters. In general, over the years, there has been an apparent increase in transparency regarding sustainability. The urgency for sustainability can be observed at all three supermarkets. Supermarkets are pursuing more policies that make it possible to control and ensure that their targets are achieved. Examples include the due diligence approach to packaging from Albert Heijn and PLUS.

At Albert Heijn, there is a positive development concerning all dimensions. More disclosure and standardization have been applied in order to be able to compare the results. Much insight has been brought in Food miles, and this is partly due to the due diligence approach.

At PLUS, there has been a stable amount of reporting on sustainability. However, most attention is focused on the dimension of health*. There is active participation in campaigns to change eating patterns.

Aldi gives several dimensions much openness. To the exact number of products in the range of a certain dimension. A sustainability standard is also used, namely, GRI. However, in terms of some dimensions, the reporting lags, namely animal welfare. Goals that are not set Aldi itself are really often not achieved

These reports also make it clear where the motivation comes from to become more sustainable. Sustainability is often referred to as the motivation, but it is also a cost. Aldi’s CSR report 2017 also mentions “high relevance to business success”. It is often suggested that something is prohibited by law and that policy has therefore been amended. This emphasizes that there are different motivations for supermarket chains to become more sustainable. Over the years, reports have become more open about their results. There is an increasing standardisation of reports from supermarkets. After all, there are more fixed standards, such as the sustainable goals of the United Nations and the GRI standard (GRI, 2017). Aldi is a frontrunner in openness and explanation of results. However, supermarkets also have different ideas about other relevant themes. This means that the reports have different characteristics.

Each supermarket has CSR initiatives that cannot be categorised according to the six sustainability dimensions. Albert Heijn emphasizes social responsibility, focusing on

neighbourhoods, this refers to local social involvement. PLUS, highlights aspects of healthy eating. Aldi talks about working conditions. Working conditions are about the state of working conditions and fair wages. There are many collaborations with various organisations to improve sustainability and subsequently, draw up a quality mark. However, it is not always clear what these quality marks must adhere to and whether they are equally transparent. It has been found that supermarkets sometimes develop their own quality marks, such as GIJS from PLUS and the Aldi Transparency Code (ATC).

4.2 Consumers

This chapter answers the question of how consumers perceive the sustainability of Dutch supermarkets.

The table below shows the rankings of the supermarkets among all 176 brands ranked by the Sustainable Brand IndexTM (i.e. overall ranking), as well as their ranking among all other supermarkets in the ranking (i.e. supermarket ranking). There are a total of eight supermarkets included in the Sustainable Brand IndexTM with number 1 being the best and number 8 being the worst.

Considering the positioning of the supermarkets, Albert Heijn and PLUS have managed to maintain their position in relation to other supermarkets. Aldi has increased from second to the last place in the ranking to place 5.

Sustainable AH AH AH PLUS PLUS PLUS Aldi Aldi Aldi Brand 2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020 2018 2019 2020 IndexTM Overall 9 11 15 34 41 32 110 110 66 Ranking Supermarket 1 1 1 4 4 4 7 7 5 Ranking Table 2: Sustainable Brand IndexTM and Supermarkets Overall Ranking = In proportion to 176 ranked brands Supermarket ranking = In proportion to the eight supermarkets

4.3 Society organisations

This chapter answers the question of what society organisations communicate about the three supermarkets’ sustainability initiatives. After thoroughly searching for publications by the society organisations on the demarcated theme within the past three years, Greenpeace is chosen to represent the society organisations perspective. Greenpeace is one of the largest and most well-known society organisations. Another reason for using Greenpeace as the representative is that they investigate and publish articles across various dimensions, whereas many organisations focus on only one dimension. Wakker Dier, for example, focuses solely on animal welfare. That being said, publications in popular media by other organisations are also analysed and when relevant included in the analysis.

The degree of reporting is analysed based on a scorecard. This scorecard ranges from 'lacking' up to 'Extensive'. Initially, it is analysed if the topic is discussed in mainstream media. Subsequently, it is analysed in what the depth the dimensions are covered. Are there only examples or is there an extensive campaign.

Dimension / AH AH AH PLUS PLUS PLUS Aldi Aldi Aldi Mainstream Supermarket 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 2017 2018 2019 media (dimension) Environment + + + ± ± - ± ± - ++

Animal ++ ++ ++ ++ + + ++ ++ ++ ++ welfare Packaging - ++ ++ - - ± + ± ± ± ++

Food miles - - - - + ------

Health* - - - ± ------

Food waste - - ± ------

Mainstream ++ + ± media (Per supermarket) Table 3: Dimension and Supermarkets Relative to Society Organisations ++ Extensive: Extensive attention/call-up/prize winner + Reasonably extensive: Covered extensively in the media ± Reported, named in campaign/report - Single reports - - Reports Lacking

4.3.1 Environment

Greenpeace started the campaign “On the way to PlanetProof” to implore supermarkets to pay a reasonable portion of extra costs coming along with “On the way to PlanetProof” harvest in fruits, vegetables and potatoes. The supermarkets have faced pressure from Greenpeace to participate in “PlanetProof” (Greenpeace Nederland, 2020). The campaign strives for harvests without pesticides but also without a loss of income for farmers. A survey of 137 farmers shows that most supermarkets are willing to pay for the extra costs that come along with “PlanetProof” harvests, and PLUS is notably more transparent about how much extra they pay to farmers. Supermarkets pay approximately 11% more for sustainable farming, although farmers say this is not always sufficient to cover extra costs. Finally, Albert Heijn is not willing to participate in the “On the way to PlanetProof” campaign, which is a missed opportunity according to Greenpeace for the largest supermarket with a market share of almost 35% in 2019 to participate in this campaign.

4.3.2 Animal Welfare

Analysing at the animal welfare dimension, Greenpeace is committed to animal welfare, but then mainly emphasises the impact on the environment (Greenpeace Nederland, 2018). At the same time, Wakker Dier (“awake animal”) is the frontrunner in reporting around the animal welfare dimension. Wakker Dier is a soc responsible organisation that aims to reduce unhealthy conditions for animals. They confront supermarkets on the absence of quality marks (Metro, 2019). Wakker Dier wants chicken in supermarkets to have at least one star of the Beter Leven mark. Beter Leven quality mark is on packaging in the supermarket. The number of stars provides information about the living conditions of animals. In Wakker Dier research involving 12 Dutch supermarkets, PLUS does best when it comes to the wellbeing of chickens (Metro, 2019), Aldi promised to stop the so-called “plofkip”, a fast-growing chicken that is specially bred for meat production, as of 2020. The proposed alternative by Aldi is still far from satisfactory and far from the desired conditions for chickens and would only receive one star according to the Better Leven mark. Lastly, Albert Heijn hardly offers chicken with quality marks. Only 12% of the 2018 assortment had a quality mark, which dropped to 8% in 2019. Wakker Dier might expect a different level of responsibility from the market leader regarding sustainability, quality marks, and animal welfare. Wakker Dier expected Albert Heijn to be an example for other players in the market. Wakker Dier has an annual competition called “liegebeest” (Wakker Dier, 2020). In this competition, the focus on misleading consumers and pictures of animal-unfriendly products. It is notable that in this dimension, there is both negative and positive attention. However, most attention is paid to harmful procedures.

4.3.3 Packaging

Greenpeace also has the designation of “grooste mispaksel”. Attention is then drawn to the enormous amount of superfluous disposable plastic that is still in the supermarket. According to Greenpeace, it is impossible for consumers not to buy plastic. Albert Heijn and PLUS are nominated in Greenpeace's Mispaksel Election for food products with superfluous packaging. It has turned out that PLUS utilises superfluous plastic for their Fairtrade bananas, and Albert Heijn been accused of too much plastic in their meal salad (Distrifood, 2019). Based on Mispaksel award, companies indicate to modify the packaging (NOS, 2019b).

It turns out that for the dimension of “packaging”, there is no frontrunner in the field of reporting. Much is reported in the media on the subject of plastic, and there is also reference to packaging material at supermarkets. Research has been conducted into packaging material at supermarkets by Natuur and Milieu (2019), which strives for a circular economy. According to this research, it appears that the recycling of packaging from private labels in the largest supermarkets in the Netherlands can be significantly improved. This research also shows that Albert Heijn and PLUS outperform Aldi in the field of packaging material.

4.3.4. Food Miles No publications were found from Greenpeace critically looking at food miles involving any of the three Dutch supermarkets. However, Foodwatch pays attention to products that contain deception by awarding the “Gouden Windei” to the most misleading food product of the year.

The aim is for the relevant products to adapt their packaging (Foodwatch NL, n.d.). An example is that Albert Heijn offers asparagus from Peru, watermelon from South Africa and Galia melons from Brazil as seasonal products (AFG, 2019). Albert Heijn indicated to change the packaging and clear up the origin of the product (AD, 2019).

4.3.5 Health

No publications were found from Greenpeace critically looking at a climate-friendly diet or lifestyle involving any of the three Dutch supermarkets. An article was found by OneWorld (2019) talking about the doubling of meat commercials by Albert Heijn in 2018. Consumers are prepared to eat less meat in order to protect the environment (Trouw, 2018). However, it has turned out that supermarkets promote customers to keep eating meat. They do this by putting meat in the spotlight through advertising and offering it at a low price (OneWorld, 2019). It creates a vicious circle, which makes it difficult to follow a climate- friendly diet.

4.3.6 Food waste

Greenpeace does not report on the food waste dimension. There are no other mainstream media outlets that pay much attention to this. A reason for this could be that supermarkets seem to be in control of their food waste, even to the extent that there is too little waste left for homeless shelters and charities (Volkskrant, 2020).

5. Conclusion

The chapter aims to analyse supermarkets’ CSR reports and to determine the accused greenwashing supermarkets by society organisations, and how this influences the supermarkets’ actions and consumers’ perceptions on the supermarket’s sustainability.

Looking at the supermarkets’ CSR reports, there is an evident change in policy; sustainability is an essential topic for supermarkets. The dimensions on which all supermarkets extensively report are packaging, animal welfare, food waste and the environment. Information on the dimensions of food miles and health is much less available or reported less extensively. Supermarkets do not seem to focus much on reducing food miles or pushing their customers to a more climate-friendly lifestyle.

Albert Heijn and Shell have both taken significant steps towards transparency and policy. Aldi transparency always has been sufficient; however, they have difficulty putting their policies into practice.

Consumers’ perceptions of supermarkets’ sustainability is relatively stable. Albert Heijn has been able to keep its leading position over the years despite all the critical media attention from social organisations, while Aldi has managed to improve its ranking.

Looking at society organisations, publications differ from dimension to dimension. Society organisations seem to focus mainly on the environment, animal welfare, and packaging, but

less attention is paid to food miles, health, and food waste. Awards handed out to supermarkets and their products prove to be popular. There are examples where initiatives such as “Liegebeest”, “Mispaksel”, and “Het Gouden Windei” led supermarkets to change their communications or products. No publications have been found that criticised an entire CSR report.

An interesting finding when comparing the publications made by society organisations and the supermarkets, they target is that their publications are mainly aimed at the market leader, Albert Heijn, even though the CSR report comparison shows that Aldi scores worse on the sustainability dimensions. Besides, criticising supermarkets, society organisations also form partnerships with supermarkets. For example, PlanetProof from Greenpeace is a partnership with supermarkets that contributes to sustainable products and more transparency and clarity for consumers. Lastly, society organisations are not always critical. They also address supermarkets that are doing well and address positive change in supermarket policy, mainly the result of criticism by the same society organisation.

Each of the three perspectives (i.e. supermarkets, consumers, and society organisations) has a slightly different view of sustainability, and each has its own interests and motivations. It has been found that each supermarket focuses on it is their interests, then tries to transfer these interests to the consumer. There are many areas of tension between different perspectives. Supermarkets and society organisations try to convince consumers that they are truthful.

It has emerged that the different perspectives also have effects on each other. It can be concluded from Table 3 that the criticism of society organisations is very significant. Although, the published criticism does not result in a decrease in perception among consumers when looking at the Sustainable Brand Index™ (Table 2), public criticism does lead to change. This is likely because organisations are concerned about customers’ perception of the supermarket’s sustainability, and thus their attitudes and perhaps even behaviour might change if they do not respond to the criticism.

There is overlap between the dimensions least reported by supermarkets and society organisations. Topics such as food miles and health* receive significantly less attention than the other dimensions. Supermarkets cover dimension health*, but this is not a topic covered by society organisation. This could partly have to do with the interests and values of society organisations, which often tend to focus on a particular dimension, such as animal wellbeing. It also goes hand in hand with the lack of push from the consumer for supermarkets to focus on these topics. Future research should further explore this topic.

This thesis has shown that social organisations are moderators of the market. They help keep the market sustainable. It has turned out that consumers do not think differently about supermarkets after criticism from society organisations. Nevertheless, criticism has changed the policy of Dutch supermarkets. This criticism of social organisation is admittedly to the market’s largest player. Nonetheless, this criticism appears to affect the policies of Albert Heijn, PLUS and Aldi. The interaction between supermarkets and society seems to be an effective system. When supermarkets are guilty of greenwashing, social organisations jump on top of that. This media attention, in turn, results in changes in supermarkets.

In my thesis, it was investigated how the perspective: supermarket, consumer and society organisations communication about sustainability. Towards supermarkets, CSR reports were used, social organisations were treated by analysing messages in mainstream media, and the consumers perspective was based on The Sustainable Brand Index™. It turned out that society organisations by crucial role by criticising supermarkets. Supermarkets are sensitive to the criticism and adjust their policy. Consumers’ perceptions of supermarkets’ sustainability stable, it is therefore also essential to observe that social organisations play a crucial role in the market.

6. Discussion

In this chapter of the thesis, all elements are critically discussed and evaluated.

“Since CSR activities become ever more widespread, greenwashing is a mounting concern, creating growing consumer scepticism about corporate environmentalism and threatening to undermine the credibility of corporate communications” (Lyon & Montgomery, 2013, p. 755). Lyon & Montgomery, for example, paint quite a dramatic picture in terms of greenwashing by companies, but this is not something found after analysing the results. The analysis of CSR reports in this thesis show that supermarkets show an increasing interest in sustainability. CSR can be used as a competitive advantage. (Gupta & C. Benson, 2012). However, it has not been found that supermarkets greenwash their CSR reports. “The image of a supermarket is vital to consumers. Research reveals that putting sustainability in the spotlight is a more critical factor than the sustainability process itself” (Nielsen, 2015). As this could facilitate greenwashing, it was vital to have a critical look at the supermarkets’ CSR reports and see if CSR is part of their sustainability strategy and policy, or simply solely a separate strategy to boost their image.

The consumer may have become critical, but it is not always made easy for them to be sustainable. An overwhelming amount of information makes it difficult for consumers to choose. It sometimes happens that one quality mark addresses the other quality mark for the sustainability of a product (Kamsma, 2020). This ambiguity also contributes to the idea that sometimes it is a competition to make quality marks, which can lead to greenwashing with quality marks. This can lead to TerraChoice’s (2010) seven sins of greenwashing. However, it has also become apparent that all the social pressure contributes to reducing greenwashing. “There are many reasons to believe that this ‘social media power’ will improve the quality of corporate environmental communications and reduce greenwashing” (Lyon & Montgomery, 2013, p. 756). Society organisations are essential, and they ensure that they keep information streams in balance. They do this by checking what the supermarkets are doing, if they disagree with it, they write a publication or hand out a prize. Moreover, the consumer can, therefore, make a more informed choice.

There are some limitations to this thesis. It must be taken into account that this research has mainly focused on the perspective of supermarkets and social organisations. This thesis is limited to three supermarkets: Albert Heijn, PLUS, and Aldi. These three supermarkets were chosen because of high-quality data selection. These supermarkets occupy various positions on the Sustainable Brand Index™, and each has its own approach to the market. This results

in a limited scope. Sustainability reports from 2017–2019 were chosen because it is possible to compare these reports with a sustainability index that started in 2017. The choices made during the analysis of CSR are sensitive. There can be a different point of view on sustainability. If this study were repeated, the results might show different outcomes. It has also been found that the established dimensions overlap several issues. This could cause some things to be interpreted differently. The established dimensions for this thesis are the environment, animal welfare, packaging, food miles, health*, and food waste (Rabobank, 2019). From these dimensions, it appears that not all themes in the CSR report can be addressed. Dimensions that are often mentioned are local entrepreneurship, the male-female ratio in the company, and the social importance of supermarkets in society. Beyond these established dimensions, there is another intriguing dimension to be remarked. This one is about labour conditions. This dimension is interesting because Oxfam Novib extensively elaborates on it.

There are also limitations when it comes to the consumer perspective. This is because the information comes from an external source, Sustainable Brand Index™. It cannot be determined whether established dimensions by Rabobank match the information that results from the Sustainable Brand Index™. There could be that the Sustainable Brand Index™ has ensured that Albert Heijn works quickly to do more for sustainability to meet the image imposed on them. Albert Heijn has undoubtedly been aware of the influence society organisations have on consumers, positively as well as negatively. Society organisations also tend to use the market leader as an example to emphasise their sustainability interests with extra force. There is a love-hate relationship between these parties.

Although, the society organisations are considered to be reliable, they are potentially somewhat biased when calling out greenwashing because they tend to only focus on those aspects that align with their values or mission such as animal cruelty, slave labour or environmental issues. Furthermore, how supermarkets dealt with waste, results in the dilemma of finding the balance between less plastic and food waste (plastic often enables one to conserve fruit and vegetable longer). Plastic wrapping increases shelf life, which in turn reduces food waste but creates more plastic waste. Hence, it creates a wicked problem, and supermarkets have to balance these two. Another issue is where both supermarkets and society organisations have developed quality marks or sustainability programs. In some cases, the society organisations develop a quality mark or program for supermarkets and accuse supermarkets of greenwashing if they do not adopt these marks or programs. This could potentially be damaging for the society organisations, and an example is Greenpeace. They are critical, on the one hand, but on the other hand, Greenpeace helps to create quality marks used by supermarkets. In the case of Albert Heijn, Greenpeace is accusing the supermarket of not participating in “PlanetProof”, but on the other hand, Albert Heijn is involved in the environment through an agreement with Natuur & Milieu (RetailNews, 2016). The question that arises is whether Greenpeace accuses Albert Heijn of greenwashing because they actually greenwash, or whether Greenpeace is simply upset that the supermarket does not take part in their program but instead chooses for another alternative. It is also challenging to determine whether the non-naming of dimensions by social organisations has to do with that good sense with this dimension or whether dimensions are

overlooked. When it comes to the dimension of food washes, I suspect that supermarkets have it under control. However, the situation of the health* and food miles dimensions is different. Simply because supermarkets and social organisations have not reported about these dimensions. Furthermore, it is precisely these dimension health* and food miles that are essential for a planet-friendly diet. It is therefore remarkable that these dimensions are treated so limitedly. Green choices are required to entice more potential consumers to view sustainability as mainstream (Paul et al., 2016). Supermarkets have targets in the long term (2030), which makes it more difficult for the society organisations to address their policies. A supermarket can always indicate that they will achieve their goal in the future. I believe that these vague objectives make it reasonable to consider that there may be greenwashing at supermarkets. Goals should be more concrete and explicit. Sub goals are always useful in this case to categorise the shorter- and longer-term goals, which makes it more visible of what is going to happen. I would recommend that more in-depth research should be done on overarching quality marks for sustainability. Could quality marks possibly contribute to more sustainable consumption? I would also recommend future research to look at the standardisation of sustainability reports to make it possible for consumers to take a critical look at supermarket policy.

8. Reference list

AD. (2019, December 5). Albert Heijn past misleidende producten aan na nominatie voor

Gouden Windei. https://www.ad.nl/koken-en-eten/albert-heijn-past-misleidende-

producten-aan-na-nominatie-voor-gouden-windei~a104af31/

AFG. (2019, November 25). ‘Seizoensgroente’ AH genomineerd voor Gouden Windei. https://www.agf.nl/article/9166570/seizoensgroente-ah-genomineerd-voor-gouden-

windei/

Ailawadi, K. L., & Keller, K. L. (2004). Understanding retail branding: conceptual insights and research priorities. Journal of Retailing, 80(4), 331–342.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.10.008

Albert Heijn. (2017). Albert Heijn Duurzaamheidsverslag 2017. Theapsgroup.Preview.Foleon.Com.

https://theapsgroup.preview.foleon.com/albertheijn/duurzaamheidsverslag2017/cover/

Albert Heijn. (2018). Albert Heijn Duurzaamheidsverslag 2018 - Cover. Theapsgroup.Foleon.Com.

https://theapsgroup.foleon.com/albertheijn/duurzaamheidsverslag2018/cover/

Albert Heijn. (2019). Duurzaamheidsverslag 2019 Albert Heijn. Static.Ahold.Com. https://static.ahold.com/media/002326700/000/002326738_001_AHN0120828490_A

H_Duurzaamheidsverslag_2019_v11_200dpi.pdf

Albert Heijn (2020). Duurzaamheid. https://www.ah.nl/over-ah/duurzaamheid

ALDI North. (2017). ALDI North Group Sustainability Report 2017. Aldi.Nl. https://www.aldi.nl/content/dam/aldi/corporate- responsibility/de/nachhaltigkeitsbericht/2017/sonstige/downloads-und-

archiv/en/ALDI_North_Group-Sustainability_Report_2017-

EN.pdf.res/1591782514532/ALDI_North_Group-Sustainability_Report_2017-EN.pdf

ALDI North. (2018). ALDI North Group Interim Report 2018. Www.Aldi-Nord.De. https://www.aldi-nord.de/content/dam/aldi/corporate-responsibility/en/sustainability- report/2017/update-2018/ALDI_North_Group_EN_Interim_Report_2018-

EN.pdf.res/1591781842850/ALDI_North_Group_EN_Interim_Report_2018-EN.pdf

ALDI North. (2019). Aldi-Nord.De. Retrieved 20 October 2020, from https://www.aldi-

nord.de/en/sustainability-report/2019.html

Alles over Albert Heijn | Albert Heijn. (n.d.). Ah.Nl. Retrieved 20 October 2020, from https://www.ah.nl/over-ah

Arlt, D., Hopp,eAugustusWolling, J. (2011). Climate change and media usage: Effects on problem awareness and behavioural intentions. International Communication

Gazette, 73(1–2), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048510386741

Banerjee, S., Gulas, C. S., & Iyer, E. (1995). Shades of Green: A Multidimensional Analysis of Environmental Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 24(2), 21–31.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1995.10673473

CBL. (2020, 25, Augustus). Duurzaamheid. https://www.cbl.nl/themas/duurzaamheid/

Colby, M. (2020, 19 Maart). Ben & Jerry’s — 20 Years of Greenwashing. Regeneration

Vermont. https://regenerationvermont.org/20-years-of-greenwashing/

Cone Communications (2015). The 2015 Cone Communications/Ebiquity Global CSR Study. https://www.conecomm.com/2015-cone-communications-ebiquity-global-csr-study-

pdf

Consumentenbond. (2018, July). DUURZAMER ETEN: GROENTE EN FRUIT BIJ DE SUPERMARKT. https://www.consumentenbond.nl/binaries/content/assets/cbhippowebsite/tests/gezond

-eten/rapport-duurzaamheid-groente-en-fruit-in-de-supermarkt-26.06.2018.pdf

Dahl, R. (2010). Green Washing. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(6), A246–A252.

https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.118-a246

Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The Drivers of Greenwashing. California

Management Review, 54(1), 64–87. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.54.1.64

Distrifood. (2019, September 2). Nominatie AH, Jumbo en Plus voor ‘Mispaksel’. https://www.distrifood.nl/ondernemen/nieuws/2019/09/ah-jumbo-en-plus- genomineerd-voor-mispaksel-

101126634?_ga=2.166352382.1775027607.1604029800-265923.1604029800

Duurzaam ondernemen. (2019, July 4). Aldi, Lidl en PLUS scoren slecht op supermarktenranglijst Oxfam Novib. https://www.duurzaam-ondernemen.nl/aldi-lidl-

en-plus-scoren-slecht-op-supermarktenranglijst-oxfam-novib/

Earth Overshoot Day. (2020, June). CALCULATING EARTH OVERSHOOT DAY 2020. Global Footprint Network. https://www.overshootday.org/content/uploads/2020/06/Earth-Overshoot-Day-2020-

Calculation-Research-Report.pdf

Fernandez-Feijoo, B., Romero, S., & Ruiz, S. (2013). Effect of Stakeholders’ Pressure on Transparency of Sustainability Reports within the GRI Framework. Journal of

Business Ethics, 122(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1748-5

Foodwatch NL. (n.d.). De successen van voedselwaakhond foodwatch in Nederland. Retrieved 29 October 2020, from https://www.foodwatch.org/nl/over-

foodwatch/onze-successen/

Foodwatch NL. (2018, 5 November). Wint Canowater het Gouden Windei 2019? https://www.foodwatch.org/nl/onze-campagne-themas/onze-

campagnes/misleiding-en-fraude/het-gouden-windei/windei-2019/cano-water/

Goh, S. K., & Balaji, M. S. (2016). Linking green scepticism to green purchase behaviour. Journal of Cleaner Production, 131, 629–638.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.122

Greenpeace. (2017, November). De grote supermarkt biocheck. https://planet4-netherlands-

stateless.storage.googleapis.com/2018/06/Rapport-Supermarkt-Biocheck-2017.pdf

Greenpeace International. (n.d.). #About Us. Retrieved 29 October 2020, from

https://www.greenpeace.org/international/explore/about/about-us/

Greenpeace Nederland. (2018, November 15). Vlees en het Klimaat.

https://www.greenpeace.org/nl/lesmaterialen/vlees-en-klimaat/

Greenpeace Nederland. (2020, August). Greenpeace: Supermarkten moeten duurzame telers reële meerprijs betalen. https://www.greenpeace.org/nl/natuur/41575/greenpeace-

supermarkten-moeten-duurzame-telers-reele-meerprijs-betalen/

GRI. (2017). Member State Implementation of Directive 2014/95/EU. https://www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/NFRpublication%20online_version.p

Güney, T. (2014). Environmental sustainability and pressure groups. Quality &

Quantity, 49(6), 2331–2344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0116-6

Gupta, N., & C. Benson, C. (2012). Sustainability and Competitive Advantage: An Empirical Study of Value Creation. Competition Forum, 9(1), 121–136.

https://ssrn.com/abstract=2037493

European Commission (2009) Flash Eurobarometer: Europeans’ attitudes towards the issue of sustainable consumption and production. [WWW document]. URL

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/ fl_256_en.pdf .

Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2015). The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption. Journal of the Association for Information

Science and Technology, 67(9), 2047–2059. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23552

Hanss, D., & Böhm, G. (2011). Sustainability seen from the perspective of consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(6), 678–687.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01045.x

Hoekstra, A. Y., & Wiedmann, T. O. (2014). Humanity’s unsustainable environmental

footprint. Science, 344(6188), 1114–1117. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1248365

Kamsma, M. (2020, October 9). Foute vis, foute keurmerken? NRC. https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2020/10/09/het-viskeurmerk-is-geen-

duizenddingendoekje-a4015047

Kotler, P. (2011). Reinventing Marketing to Manage the Environmental Imperative. Journal

of Marketing, 75(4), 132–135. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.132

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2015). Marketing Management, Global Edition. Pearson

Education Limited.

Kumar, V., Rahman, Z., Kazmi, A. A., & Goyal, P. (2012). Evolution of Sustainability as Marketing Strategy: Beginning of New Era. Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 37, 482–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.313

Lyon, T., & Maxwell, J. (2011). ‘Greenwash: Corporate environmental disclosure under

threat of audit. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 20, 3–41.

Lyon, T. P., & Montgomery, A. W. (2013). Tweetjacked: The Impact of Social Media on Corporate Greenwash. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(4), 747–757.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1958-x

McGill University. (2020). What is sustainability? https://www.mcgill.ca/sustainability/files/sustainability/what-is-

sustainability.pdf

Metro. (2019, October 10). Wakker Dier: Aldi en Lidl hebben slechtste aanbod kipvleeswaren. Metronieuws. https://www.metronieuws.nl/in-het-

nieuws/2019/10/wakker-dier-aldi-en-lidl-hebben-slechtste-aanbod-kipvleeswaren/

Milieu Centraal. (n.d.). Alle categorieën. Keurmerkenwijzer. Retrieved 16 October 2020,

from https://keurmerkenwijzer.nl/alle-categorieen/

Natuur & Milieu. (2019, August). Duurzaamheid van verpakkingen in de supermarkt. https://www.natuurenmilieu.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/NM-Duurzame-

Verpakkingen-rapport-ia-v8-1.pdf

Nielsen. (2015, October). GLOBAL-SUSTAINABILITY-REPORT. The Nielsen Company.

https://www.nielsen.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/04/global-sustainability-

report-oct-2015.pdf

Noble, H., & Heale, R. (2019). Triangulation in research, with examples. Evidence-Based

Nursing, 22(3), 67–68. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2019-103145

NOS. (2019a, August 29). Strijd tegen voedselverspilling: ‘Een leuke competitie tussen supermarkten’. https://nos.nl/artikel/2299470-strijd-tegen-voedselverspilling-een-

leuke-competitie-tussen-supermarkten.html

NOS. (2019b, October 29). Mispaksel-prijs voor meest onzinnige plastic verpakking uitgereikt. https://nos.nl/artikel/2308153-mispaksel-prijs-voor-meest-onzinnige-

plastic-verpakking-uitgereikt.html

Nyilasy, G., Gangadharbatla, H., & Paladino, A. (2013). Perceived Greenwashing: The Interactive Effects of Green Advertising and Corporate Environmental Performance on Consumer Reactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), 693–707.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1944-3

OneWorld. (2019, August 15). Dit is hoe supermarkten ons in de steak laten.

https://www.oneworld.nl/lezen/opinie/dit-is-hoe-supermarkten-ons-in-de-steak-laten/

Oxfam Novib. (2019, June 21). Nederlandse supermarkten scoren slecht op duurzaamheidsranglijst Oxfam. https://www.oxfamnovib.nl/persberichten/nederlandse-supermarkten-scoren-slecht-

op-duurzaamheidsranglijst-oxfam

Paul, J., Modi, A., & Patel, J. (2016). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and Consumer

Services, 29, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.006

PLUS. (2017). MVO Jaarverslag 2017. Plus.Nl. https://www.plus.nl/INTERSHOP/static/WFS/PLUS-Site/website-webshop/PLUS-

websitewebshop/nl_NL/Contentpaginas/Over%20PLUS/Persinformatie/Verantwoord

ensociaaljaarverslag_PLUS_2017.pdf

PLUS. (2018). Jaarverslag 2018. Plus.Nl. https://www.plus.nl/INTERSHOP/static/WFS/PLUS-Site/website-webshop/PLUS- websitewebshop/nl_NL/Contentpaginas/Over%20PLUS/Persinformatie/Jaarverslag_P

LUS_2018.pdf

PLUS. (2019). Jaarverslag 2019. Plus.Nl. https://www.plus.nl/INTERSHOP/static/WFS/PLUS-Site/website-webshop/PLUS- websitewebshop/nl_NL/Contentpaginas/Verantwoord/2019/Jaarverslag%202019_DE

F.pdf?s=3605697

PLUS. (2020). Maatschappelijk verantwoord ondernemen. https://www.plus.nl/info-

verantwoord/maatschappelijk-verantwoord-ondernemen

PLUS als organisatie - over PLUS | PLUS. (n.d.). Plus.Nl. Retrieved 20 October 2020, from

https://www.plus.nl/info-over-plus/organisatie

Polderman, N. (2014, February). Kopen supermarkten verantwoord in? De Consumentenbond.https://www.consumentenbond.nl/binaries/content/assets/cbhippo

website/tests/gezond-eten/201402p50-test-duurzaamheid-supermarkten.pdf

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Strategic Direction, 23(5), 1–16.

https://doi.org/10.1108/sd.2007.05623ead.006

Rabobank. (2019, December). Voedingsmiddelenindustrie.

https://www.rabobank.nl/bedrijven/cijfers-en-trends/food/voedingsmiddelenindustrie/

Redactie Adformatie. (2007, November 5th). Campagne Wakker Dier heeft effect op Mora.

Adformatie. https://www.adformatie.nl/digital-transformation-tech/campagne-

wakker-dier-heeft-effect-op-mora

RetailNews. (2016, August 1). Albert Heijn en Jumbo in actie tegen bijensterfte.

https://retailtrends.nl/news/45477/albert-heijn-en-jumbo-in-actie-tegen-bijensterfte

RetailTrends. (2016, November 6). Het duurzame verspaleis van Albert Heijn [Photograph].

RetailTrends. https://www.mupload.nl/img/ivtfjnjyppo3t.jpg

RTL nieuws. (2018, 20 oktober). Vaarwel ’Ik kies bewust’-Vinkje, maar waar blijft de opvolger?https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/economie/artikel/4457336/gezonde-ongezonde-

keuze-ik-kies-bewust-logo-voedselkeuze

Santillo, D. (2007). Reclaiming the Definition of Sustainability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research - International, 14(1), 60–66.

https://doi.org/10.1065/espr2007.01.375

Schmuck, D., Matthes, J., & Naderer, B. (2018). Misleading Consumers with Green Advertising? An Affect–Reason–Involvement Account of Greenwashing Effects in Environmental Advertising. Journal of Advertising, 47(2), 127–145.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2018.1452652

Sterling, J. (2003). Translating strategy into effective implementation: dispelling the myths and highlighting what works. Strategy & Leadership, 31(3), 27–34.

https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570310472737

Sustainable Brand IndexTM. (2020). EUROPE’S LARGEST BRAND STUDY ON SUSTAINABILITY (OFFICIAL REPORT, 2020). https://ss- usa.s3.amazonaws.com/c/308477602/media/59715eb9af935747e65384117832014/N

L_Official%20Report_2020.pdf

Terra choice. (2010). The seven sins of greenwashing. Underwriters Laboratories.

The 2015 Cone Communications/Ebiquity Global CSR Study. (2015). Cone Communications. https://www.conecomm.com/2015-cone-communications-ebiquity-global-csr-study-

pdf

The Guardian. (2018, 18 Augustus). “Wild West” of eco-labels: sustainability claims are confusing consumers. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/eco-labels-

sustainability-trust-corporate-government

Trouw. (2018, October 29). Nederlanders willen minder vee en zeggen dat ze bereid zijn dan ook minder vlees te eten. https://www.trouw.nl/nieuws/nederlanders-willen-minder-

vee-en-zeggen-dat-ze-bereid-zijn-dan-ook-minder-vlees-te-eten~bfa8d739/

United Nations. (1987). Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on

Environment and Development. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-02.htm#I van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between Agency and Communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), 95–105.

https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023331212247

Voedingscentrum. (2019). Keurmerken.

https://www.voedingscentrum.nl/encyclopedie/keurmerken.aspx

Voedingscentrum. (2020). Over het Voedingscentrum. Retrieved 16 October 2020, from

https://www.voedingscentrum.nl/nl/service/over-ons.aspx

Volkskrant. (2020, October 19). Acties tegen voedselverspilling nekken voedselbanken. De

Volkskrant. https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/acties-tegen-

voedselverspilling-nekken-voedselbanken~b2779773/

Wakker Dier. (2020, 10 September). Liegebeestverkiezing.

https://www.wakkerdier.nl/campagnes/liegebeest/

Wolf, J. (2013). The Relationship Between Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Stakeholder Pressure and Corporate Sustainability Performance. Journal of Business

Ethics, 119(3), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1603-0